This chapter examines the scope of copyright protection for architectural works, with particular emphasis on the legal challenges surrounding the definition of a “building” and the protection of non-habitable structures. It explores the historical development of copyright protection for architectural works and highlights the uncertainties that arise when distinguishing protected architectural works from non-protected three-dimensional structures such as bridges, dams, and monuments. The study compares the legal frameworks governing architectural copyright in the United Kingdom and Zambia. It finds that while both jurisdictions recognize architectural works as copyrightable artistic works, the United Kingdom provides a broader and clearer definition of a building under its copyright legislation, thereby offering greater legal certainty. In contrast, the Zambian Copyright Act does not define the term “building,” creating ambiguity regarding the scope of protection available to architects and designers. The chapter further
analyzes the remedies available for copyright infringement, including damages, injunctions, accounts of profits, delivery up of infringing articles, and criminal sanctions. It observes that although both jurisdictions provide similar remedies and comply with international copyright standards, the absence of clear statutory definitions and judicial guidance in Zambia limits the effective enforcement of rights relating to architectural works. The study concludes that legal clarity regarding the protection of architectural works is essential to safeguard the rights and interests of creators while encouraging innovation and development within the architectural profession.

Keywords: Architectural Works, Copyright Infringement, Intellectual Property Rights, Copyright Protection